What we got is a healthcare system modeled on the best healthcare systems in Europe, those of Germany, Switzerland, and the Netherlands. HCP's most recent Euro Canada Healthcare Consumer Index evaluated healthcare systems of 33 European nations and Canada. The five countries which rated highest, in order, with point totals, were
1. the Netherlands 857
2. Germany 825
3. Iceland 821
4. France 809
5. Switzerland 806
The Canadian system, which the American left is so obsessed with finished 25th with a score of 594, just below Portugal and just above Slovakia.
The report includes the following remarks about the Canadian system:
Canada’s overall performance improved, but not enough to enable Canada to pass other
countries to move up in the rankings. Canada finishes in 25th place of the 34 countries
analyzed in this 2010 index. This is a similar placement to last year, when Canada
finished 23rd of 32.Healthcare spending:• What makes Canada’s placement in the bottom half of the rankings particularly
troubling is the fact that per capita healthcare spending in Canada is amongst the
highest in the world.
• Canada’s national and provincial governments spend over $3,500 per person on
healthcare each year—more than all but three of the countries analyzed in the index.
Only Norway, Switzerland and Luxembourg spend more money per capita on healthcare
than Canada.
• Canada’s poor performance in the ECHCI therefore cannot be attributed to
inadequate funding. Canadians are paying for a world-class healthcare system but for
a variety of reasons, they are not getting one.
• Canada’s healthcare problems do not stem from a lack of money, and it is therefore
unlikely that they can be solved by throwing more money at the problem. Instead,
substantial reforms to the way that healthcare is financed and delivered appear to
be necessary in order to bring the performance of Canada’s healthcare system into
alignment with high levels of spending.http://www.fcpp.org/files/1/10-05-10-Euro-Canada_Index_2010_FINAL.pdfThe former head of the Canadian Medical Association gave an interview with the Kaiser Health News last year after returning from a trip to Europe on which he studied several European healthcare systems, looking for ideas to improve the Canadian system. He was asked his opinion about how the US should proceed to implement universal healthcare.
Q:
Which country offers the best model for the United States? A:
A system like the Netherlands is interesting because it could work in your country. system is run by private insurance companies, six insurance companies. Some are for-profit and some are not-for-profit. It's not the government that is running the health care system, it is those companies. But they have rules. The first one is that it's compulsory to be insured. No company can refuse any patient. And if the patient is low income then the government will pay the premium. So the result is every patient is on the same level and has the same importance, because the money follows the patient. What they are doing is what they call "managed" competition. So as you can see, it's a bit different from what you have in the United States right now. But I was thinking it might work for you.Q:
Do you think there's room for this same sort of competition in the United States between public and private plans? A:
It could be one solution. In the Netherlands and some other countries … the state is paying the premium for those who cannot afford it. It's not a system in competition with the private system. It's a way of doing things. I'm not saying what your president is proposing is bad. But what they are doing in those countries is instead of creating a public system or public insurance, the paying the premiums.<snip>
Q:
Would the United States be well-advised to adopt some of the Canadian ways of doing health care? A:
I think so. The most important thing for us is to keep our system universal. If it is one value that you want to import, that's fine. But it doesn't mean you need to import all because it won't work in the States. And it's the same for us. You have good things in your system. But we don't want to have your system here in Canada. This is why we went to some European countries, to look at something different. And the first value we were looking for is universal access. Q:
What do you think about the chances of overhauling the health system in America? A:
You know, you're the number one country in the world. But to have 46 million Americans who don't have insurance coverage or coverage for health care, for me, it's not acceptable. But we need to improve both of our systems. And maybe we should look at what Europeans are doing — some solutions they have used — because they have universal coverage and their costs are much lower. http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Checking-In-With/ouellet.aspxHealthcare policy is far more complicated than the simplistic nostrums peddled by PNHP. If people here would make an honest effort to understand how healthcare is provided in countries such as the Netherlands and Germany, they would come to appreciate that President Obama and the congressional Democrats went the way they did was because they were trying to adapt methods which have worked elsewhere to the realities of American political and social realities, and not because they were all in the pocket of the insurance companies.
Those people who think that Medicare is cheap don't seem to realize that the Federal Government spends over $10,000 per enrollee per year, and that the average enrollee pays about $5500 annually in additional premiums and out-of-pocket costs.